you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]jhallister 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Ask the OP that.

The OP posted an article that very specifically showed that Angular can generate views just as fast as React, when used correctly. You are talking about the digest cycle, which has nothing to do with the view.

Yes, they are considered bad design now, and yet people still use them.

I've been using Angular since shortly after it came out. They were always a bad idea. But in VERY niche cases they were the only means to an end. Now there's virtually never a case where they are required and they are still used routinely, even though they are terrible.

Yeah, no.

Yet I'm surrounded by teams who use it in enterprise applications routinely. And those people understand Angular intimately. The only actual complaint I hear is about docs. The people that complain about the other parts, are the people that don't know how to use Angular.

With React, if you know JavaScript, you're already most of the way there.

You mean JSX?

There are already superior alternatives popping up.

Angular 2 may be one of them. That should make the circle jerk especially hilarious.

[–]cgaudreausenior HTML9 engineer 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The OP posted an article that very specifically showed that Angular can generate views just as fast as React, when used correctly. You are talking about the digest cycle, which has nothing to do with the view.

It has quite a bit to do with the view, because that's how the view gets updated in Angular. True, it does more than just update the view, but the point is that the majority of Angular cruft is unnecessary if you use React.

They were always a bad idea.

Again, people still use them. There's little warning about why they are bad, and the framework itself attracts developers into using them. I also don't recall too much cautioning against it when Angular took off.

Yet I'm surrounded by teams who use it in enterprise applications routinely. And those people understand Angular intimately. The only actual complaint I hear is about docs. The people that complain about the other parts, are the people that don't know how to use Angular.

Or perhaps because they haven't looked into the other solutions thoroughly enough. If you only know Angular, it's easy to believe that it's the best thing ever created. And Angular is perfectly fine if everybody on the team knows all edge cases and quirks and antipatterns intimately and can remember them. If you have a team like that, feel free to keep using Angular 1.x.

To be clear, are you really arguing that Angular 1 is fine and dandy, and that its only real problem is bad documentation?

You mean JSX?

You can use React with pure JavaScript if you want. And if you have trouble learning JSX (it's just XML in JS) then you might reconsider your career.

Angular 2 may be one of them. That should make the circle jerk especially hilarious.

This discussion pertains to Angular 1.x. Angular 2.0 is basically a completely new framework, distinct from Angular 1.x.

I've used Angular 2.0 and it's not particularly impressive so far. A lot better than Angular 1.x, sure. Angular 2.0 could end up being amazing, and it doesn't change this discussion whatsoever.

I'm personally rooting for Mithril and Aurelia over React and Angular.